Vertiginous Complaints: Usual Presentation in Private Practice and Concrete Aspects of Care and Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Vertiginous complaints represent a frequent cause for consultations in the general practice. This symptom may result from a variety of disorders. They are often repetitive and invalidating. A rigorous diagnostic approach is required, based on interrogation and clinical examination. The relevant literature supplies surprisingly few data describing the problem in the daily practice, and no study exists in France. Aim: This survey describes the presentation mode of vertiginous complaints faced by general practitioners (GPs), their frequency, type (vertigo or disequilibrium), epidemiology and repercussions on the patients’ quality of life. It analyses also the diagnostic and therapeutic strategies used by GPs. Methods: A survey of 870 GPs was carried out in October and November 2001. Information was gathered by means of a questionnaire containing 11 items. Results: 699 questionnaires were selected for statistical analysis. The average number of consultations for vertiginous complaints is 4.9/week. In two thirds of cases, patients reported disequilibrium. The age of patients suffering from disequilibrium was significantly higher (61.06 ± 9.47) than that of patients suffering from vertigo (50.89 ± 10.21). In cases of vertigo, GPs first performed neurological and ENT investigations, while they performed vascular and then neurological and ENT investigations in cases of disequilibrium. Patients were referred to a specialist in 37% of cases, mainly due to the severity and permanence of symptoms. The most common therapeutic forms were medicinal followed by physiotherapeutic. A high impact upon all aspects of the patient’s life was observed and that vertigo could mask other severe illnesses due to its invalidating nature. Conclusion: Vertigo and disequilibrium represent the complaints of 5% of the patients seen by GPs in France. Further studies are needed to assess more specifically the repercussions of vertiginous complaints on the patient’s quality of life.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".